User talk:Bermicourt/Archive 10

DYK for Germanic bodyguard

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Great - article and stats, "better" than Franz Kafka works, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Schutzhütte

Template:Infobox Schutzhütte has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. AussieLegend (✉) 04:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Straße der Megalithkultur to Road of Megalithic Culture

I do think you might have explained your reasoning for this rename on the talk page, under the notes I had already made about the name. I'd have thought, for example, that the idomatic English name might be Megalithic Culture Route. I am not aware of any British holiday routes called 'Road of', you see.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Robert. Please accept my apologies, I was a little hasty. Having translated several of these "Road" is sometimes used and there were one or two websites using it in this case. However, further research has revealed that this is part of an EU project and they and their German colleagues as well as a number of national German tourist sites are using "Route of Megalithic Culture" as the official name, so I have revised the title and added appropriate references. Are you planning to translate the German article? --Bermicourt (talk) 07:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. I notice in Category:German tourist routes that only Road of Weser Renaissance has Road at the start, but that seems to be a literal translation and probably correct. I suspect that German Avenue Road would look far less clumsy as a Route as well.

As to translation, a lot depends. There is a lot of good stuff there, and the table would translate easily enough, but it depends where I go to work. Next time I am in the area I quite fancy making my own photo-survey and using my own pictures in the English Wikipedia. I contribute my photos to http://geo-en.hlipp.de/ and they can be transferred under CC2 to the commons easily enough. I would be cautious about translating some of the paragraphs, as there are subtleties of grammar that might be problematic, and the references may not quite hold up.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 10:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

German Bodyguards

I've responded to your message on the German Bodyguards (imperial Roman) talk page. I've also added a little the article. Regards EraNavigator (talk) 13:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hieroglyphs Question

Hello, I posted a hieroglyphics template question on the talk page and would like to get further insight, can you please assist? Twillisjr (talk) 14:14, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Rügen Wars of Succession and Lüneburg War of Succession

• Hi Anthony, help me understand the logic for moving the articles above to their new names. Also please point me at any discussion that took place and why the proposer didn't inform me as the article creator. --Bermicourt (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
• These moves were requested by User:Article editor. Best query the matter with him. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Graz Central Station

I do appreciate that this is a contentious issue, and I'm not proposing any mass renamings. But ... we surely do owe a duty of accuracy to our readers, and having once walked from the city centre of Graz to the railway station, I know that it certainly isn't central. I've just checked in case my memory was misleading me, and Google Maps tells me that it is a 25 minute walk over a distance of 2km. In a relatively small city like Graz, that is not central. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 14:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I've now reverted my name change, and clarified the non-central location in text. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 15:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind response. I was new to this issue until it arose on Wikipedia. The trouble is there seems to be no definitive work on central stations or the origin of station naming that we can use as an authoritative source.

My dictionaries - Langenscheidt's massive Muret-Sanders Großwörterbuch and Ernst's Wörterbuch der Industriellen Technik - translate Hauptbahnhof both as "central station" and "main station", so both concepts are clearly valid. Ernst also adds "chief station". That deals with Hbf as a common noun i.e. "the main station in Foo is Foo West" or "the central station in Cologne is Köln-Mitte".

For its use as a proper name, there are 4 key factors that, in my view, favour "Foo Hauptbahnhof" being translated as "Foo Central Station".

First, there is evidence that Hauptbahnhof used to be Centralbahnhof (or Zentralbahnhof) in German in many, if not all, cases. Munich, Frankfurt, Magdeburg and Hamburg were certainly referred to in this way and there are other examples at de:Centralbahnhof. So there is an argument from linguistics.

Second, an analysis of the use of "Central Station" in European countries, including UK, shows that such stations are usually the principal station in a town or city, at least when they were originally named. Others have also argued, however, that some of these stations were named after a railway company e.g the Great Central Railway. But this appears to be the minority (I am aware that the US is different, but we are talking about European practice here). So there is an argument from usage.

Third, and rather surprisingly, there is widespread use of the term "Foo Central Station" in English sources when referring to German or Austrian Hbf. In particular, Deutsche Bahn and ÖBB use this in their English publications and on their website. "Foo Main Station" also occurs, but is less common and, of course, it is not a form of proper name we find in Britain or other English-speaking countries. "Hauptbahnhof" also occurs frequently, but one wonders whether that's simply because people don't know how to translate it. It's a contender, certainly, but because it's use is not overwhelming, it falls at the fourth hurdle below. So there's an argument from authoritative sources.

And fourth, there's simply WP:USEENGLISH. If we want to be intelligible to our readers (like DB and ÖBB I suppose), we need to find the nearest English language equivalent. The intelligibility or language argument.

For me the real conundrum is why did we call stations "Foo Central Station" when, often, as you've observed, they aren't central to the city? I think it may be because "Central" referred to the network, not the city i.e. the railwaymen who named them saw them as "central" to the railway network in the area they served. But that's just a theory. Hope that helps. Bermicourt (talk) 16:43, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Münzregal

{{Template:DNB}} links to a different template on the English Wikipedia. I deleted it because it was incorrect, and because I can't find an equivalent to the German one; do you know what it might be? In English it directs to the Dictionary of National Biography. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Nonexistent, sorry. What's the word for "template"? I can try and work from there. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

OK. In the meantime how shall we handle Münzregal? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Not at all. I can try and come up with a workable solution at some point soon, but no promises. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:45, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Hieroglyphen

Template:Infobox Hieroglyphen has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox hieroglyphs. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Lfdder (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Coffee vs Tea in Lower Saxony

Hi Bermicourt...do you have a source to show that most Lower Saxon's prefer coffee to tea? I saw that you took away my request for a citation and I'm confused as to why. While I generally agree that might be the case, I think that if you're going to make such a bold declarative statement that it should be backed up. I don't see why leaving the statement but requesting a reference is any different to the statement requesting one in the opening paragraph. If you do not have a reference, I'll add that back but leave your wording. I would think that would be the best practice to keep the article authoritative. Dbroer (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bermicourt...I responded to your message on my talk page and I'm not sure if you saw that or not. In a little bit I'm going to add a citation needed flag back according to WP:VERIFY until we can find a source. Either that or perhaps we should use neutral language and avoid a statement of fact without a reference. Dbroer (talk) 13:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Kaiserjäger

I was lectured yesterday (Talk:Kafka) that "we speak English" ;) - the mix in this article name Kaiserjäger leaves room for improvement. I think the redirect would be the better name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Next time, you can move into it's own redirect youself, unless that has been changed. And if not, ask an admin. Keep the new ones busy, such as Anna Frodesiak ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Substing templates

Hi! Just wanted to remind you that when you use a welcome template on someone's talkpage, that you should always substitute the template. (For example, you should use{{subst:welcome}} rather than {{welcome}}.) Cheers, — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 23:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Oooppppssss!!! Thanks for letting me know! Bermicourt (talk) 20:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

River Culm / Culm Measures

I see that a few months ago you added a section on the Culm NCA to the River Culm article. I think that's an error, and so I've moved it to the Culm Measures article instead. There doesn't seem to be any direct etymological connection between the names of the two, and it's clear from the sources that the Culm NCA covers the Culm Measures area, not the area further east through which the river flows. There may need to be a little more tightening up to be done, and both articles could do with some work. Hope that's OK. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:49, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK QPQ

Hello! Your submission of Upton Heath at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Everything in nomination is good to go -- except QPQ -- Gwillhickers 20:29, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Bermicourt (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Authoress

Hi Bermicourt. Could you please confer with me before restoring the archaic form 'authoress' to any more articles? Differentiated feminine forms, on the whole, are outdated and unnecessary. Please see WP:MODERNLANG and WP:GENDER. Gobōnobō ^{+ c} 19:23, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I just have - see your talk page. Authoress is not archaic and its use does not therefore contravene either policy. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I've responded to you over on my talk page. I can easily find a bunch of references for you that describe how the term is archaic if you'd like. Regardless, the Manual of Style says that we should "use gender-neutral language where this can be done with clarity and precision". Gobōnobō ^{+ c} 19:35, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:EngvarB

Template:EngvarB has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  — LlywelynII 06:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Militärische Einheit

Template:Infobox Militärische Einheit has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Czechia

Hello, if you are still interested in the issue (I saw your communication with "Mewulwe" on his page), there is the voting about the article, dedicated to the dispute about the name Czechia, that is continously deleted by that user and others from Wikipedia : [1] Aleatorica (talk) 09:28, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I took a note you reverted the name "Czech Republic" to Czechia, which is continuously erased by "Yopie", who is obsessed by hate to that name and wrote to you false information only "Czech Republic" can be used. It is not true, because "Czechia" is correct informal (short-form) name of the Czech state (commonly used also by Czech president Miloš Zeman), describing the area in general (historical) context. Czech Republic is transient political denomination of contemporary state system, nothing more and its use is limited only to the poeriod of its existence, thus since 1993 until now. "Yopie" seems to be a psychopathological personality and his "work" contains nothing more, than deleting the name Czechia from everywhere, also from non-English languages pages of Wikipedia. He tries to block everybody who uses this denomination. Thank you for your common sense. Jan Blanický (now blocked for linguistic articles about origin and history of the name). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.113.211.10 (talk) 06:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

German Wine Queen

Please consider listing the winners in the main article. I don't think having separate articles on each winner is appropriate. I don't think these individuals meet thewp:notability standard and there is also the issue of wp:blp1e. Candleabracadabra (talk) 15:34, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

?? Lesene reference

About this reference that I put in the Lesene article: Please be a bit thorougher before you condemn a reference. Scroll down to "L", and you will find the following text:

"lesene: A pilaster without base or capital, also called a pilaster strip..."

It is a scholarly source, too, and ought to be acceptable enough. Cheers.Kelisi (talk) 05:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Aha! I have just discerned the problem: If you use the letter links at the left, for some reason you won't find that entry. However, if you leave those alone and simply use the Find function, you will find it immediately. I guess you really have to be thorough with that website.Kelisi (talk) 05:33, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Just seen this, having already replied on your talk page. Maybe it wasn't there when I looked the first time. Never mind, all's well that end's well. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Upton Heath

The DYK project (nominate) 08:38, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Julia Klöckner

Hello! Your submission of Julia Klöckner at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! – Muboshgu (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Julia Klöckner

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for German Wine Queen

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Visbek

Would you kindly have a look at the Visbek entry when time permits? And, should it still be considered a stub entry? Yours sincerely --79.202.214.69 (talk) 16:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

No problem - done. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:36, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

That's great. I'm smiling. Thank you so much. The native Visbeker --79.202.202.16 (talk) 09:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Kein Problem. Nichts zu danken. :) --Bermicourt (talk) 19:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Drachenfels (Siebengebirge)

Just being curious. You claim the Drachenfels (Siebengebirge), along with the rest of the Siebengebirge (note the name) are hills. What is your criterium for distinguishing between the two? From a geological POV, it's a cryptovolcano (a rare example) and the rest of the Siebengebirge is volcanic in origin, too. Kleuske (talk) 11:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. The Germans classify the range as a Mittelgebirge. Kleuske (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your question - it's a good one. Firstly it's important to realize that the German words Berge and Gebirge may refer to either hills or mountains. Diercke's Wörterbuch Allgemeine Geographie translates Gebirge, for example, as "mountains", "mountain range" or "hills". In English, hills are lower than mountains, but there is no universal definition of a "mountain". However, Britain and Ireland officially use 2000 feet (610 metres) and Whittow's Physical Geography notes that "some authorities" use this definition, so in translations, I tend to use this as a guide. In the case of the Siebengebirge, even the highest point, the Ölberg, is only 460 metres high, well below a "mountain". The term Mittelgebirge has no direct equivalent in English as it includes both high hills and low mountains. Hence Diercke has various translations including: "hill country", "hills", "secondary mountain" and "mountains of moderate height". Finally it is worth noting that Dickinson's Germany. A Regional and Economic Geography says this: "The Siebengebirge is a group of residual volcanic hills that lie in between the Sieg and the Rhine. These conical-shaped hills reach heights of 400 metres and rise from a level platform with a height of 200 metres (Drachenfels, 461 metres, Petersberg)" Hope that helps and I would be grateful if you would revert your edit. Gruß. --Bermicourt (talk) 12:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Being Dutch, i tend to call anything a mountain that elevates above the surrounding landscape and actually offers a view. Especially the rather steep ones, like this. Kleuske (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I know what you mean; there are parts of England that are like a billiard table! One's even called Holland - it's in Lincolnshire! --Bermicourt (talk) 18:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

T: template redirects

Hi, you participated in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 29#T:, some of which I have relisted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November_18#T:WPTECH. Please come along and share your thoughts .. ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:39, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Vosges

Greetings! I have reverted your move of Vosges; per WP:TWODABS, there is no need for a disambiguation page where there are only two meanings of a term, and one of these meanings can be considered primary over the other. It is best to avoid moving articles to create two-link disambiguation pages without discussing this first through a requested move, as this is likely to be controversial. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Perron

Just leaving a message to thank you for creating the perron page and linking Château de Lacoste (Lot)‎ to it. Well done. Emeraude (talk) 22:47, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Pilgerweg Berlin–Wilsnack

Hallo Bermicourt,

Du hast meine Änderung am Artikel über die Plattenburg rückgängig gemacht und verweist dabei auf den Artikel in der deutschen Wikipedia. Du interpretierst den Artikel meiner Auffassung nach allerdings falsch. „Pilgerweg“ in „Pilgerweg von Berlin nach Wilsnack“ ist kein Eigenname, sondern ein beschreibendes Substantiv wie „street“ in „the street from Dover to Canterbury“ und sollte daher im Englischen kleingeschrieben werden. Ob man es besser mit pilgrim way oder pilgrimage route übersetzt, kannst Du vermutlich besser beurteilen als ich, da meine Muttersprache nicht Englisch ist. Die entsprechende Kategorie heißt hier allerdings pilgrimage routes, nicht pilgrim ways.

Schöne Grüße – Ocolon (talk) 22:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hallo Ocolon. Ja, gut. Deutsch ist auch nicht meine Muttersprache! Aber ich verstehe was du meinst. Meine Meinung nach soll es besser als "pilgrim way" übersetzt. Das klingt mir besser (historisch europäisch) als "pilgrimage route" (modern und vielleicht mehr Amerikanisch). Ich werde das erforschen... Gruß. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:53, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Palatine Forest/Leading Articles listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Palatine Forest/Leading Articles. Since you had some involvement with the Palatine Forest/Leading Articles redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Bermicourt, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Andrew Eugene 08:13, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Berg1

Template:Infobox Berg1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Übersetzung von Artikeln aus der deutschen Wikipedia?

Hallo Bermicourt,

ich habe gesehen, dass Du viele Artikel aus der deutschen Wikipedia übersetzt hast. Ich selbst habe zahlreiche exzellente und lesenswerte Artikel in Deutsch geschrieben (zum Teil wurden diese auch ins Engliche übersetzt (Mikrotom, Kristallisation (Polymer)). Zum Thema Kettenschifffahrt habe ich mehrere ausführliche Artikel verfasst (vgl. de:Benutzer:Salino01), wobei der entsprechende englische Artikel Chain steam shipping eher einem Stub ähnelt. Vielleicht hättest Du ja Lust aus den sehr interessanten deutschen Artikeln eine Zusammenfassung in Englisch zu erstellen?--Salino01 (talk) 20:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Salino. Ich bin meistens in der Eisenbahn und geographische Artikeln interessiert aber kann das mal versuchen... Gruß. --Bermicourt (talk) 09:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die Übersetzung. Ich habe Dir auf meiner Diskussionsseite geantwortet. Die beiden Bilder vom Kettengreifrad sollten keine Probleme darstellen, da der vermeintliche Autor Ewald Bellingrath (Wahrscheinlich stammen die Bilder aus seinem Patent) über 70 Jahre tot ist und die Bilder sehr alt sind. Kannst Du einen Transfer zu Commons durchführen?--Salino01 (talk) 21:52, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

German building categories

Hi. I asked Tim to create new district categories. is there any chance though you can see to linking to the German equivalent categories starting with Category:Buildings and structures in Baden-Württemberg by district. I've done the first two.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

London irish amateur DYK

I've responded to your comments on London Irish Amateur DYK. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Melcombe Bingham / Melcombe Horsey

Hello Bermicourt. Do you have any further comments regarding the possible merger of the above articles? I'm planning on adding more information about the settlements involved, but feel the merger question needs addressing. I sense you'd perhaps rather keep them separate, and I think it's probably true that no option is perfect (the settlements don't all fit neatly in one parish), though I'm concerned about repetition if two articles are retained. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 14:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Replied at the merge discussion page. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've responded. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Chain boat

Thanks and have a good weekend Victuallers (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Hewer

Hi and thank you for importing the article hewer from the German Wikipedia. I am curious about the next step of translating most of the text from German. Is this something you plan to do? Thanks again. Jim Derby (talk) 01:45, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll give it a go - thanks for prompting me! --Bermicourt (talk) 07:16, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Liste Schaubergwerke

Hallo, ich habe gesehen dass Du eine engl. Übersetzung der Liste mit Schaubergwerken angelegt hast. Vielleicht interessiert Dich ja, dass die deutsche Liste in den letzten Wochen sehr erfreulich angewachsen ist de:Liste von Schaubergwerken. Viele Grüße--Agricolax (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Scharfenberg Castle (Palatinate)

Hi, can you use buildings and structures in xxx (district) for buildings now?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Got it. No problem. --Bermicourt (talk) 13:44, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Favor

Greetings, Bermicourt. If you are willing, could you please help me out by translating one quote from German to English and also one article from German to English? Thanks.Hoops gza (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Hoops! The quote - I'll try. The article - well it depends on length and subject. I have a Greek exam coming up! --Bermicourt (talk) 07:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much. The quote is in the Aktion Reinhardt section of de:Josef Oberhauser (SS-Mitglied), that is, the one from the Belzec Trial. The article is de:Gebhard Ludwig Himmler, Himmler's older brother.Hoops gza (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I've translated the quote here - happy for you to dovetail it in as you see fit. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I've dovetailed it in, thanks much.Hoops gza (talk) 20:35, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Danke for your fantastic work on Gebhard. Would I be pressing you if I asked you about translating other German articles in the future?Hoops gza (talk) 18:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Feel free. I tend to favour articles on geographical regions and features (mountains, rivers, forests, etc); military history, including castles, historic railways, nobility; that sort of thing. Not at all keen on the arts, politics, entertainment or anything modern! --Bermicourt (talk) 20:28, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Could you please look into expanding the stub Richard Wendler and translating de:Falk Zipperer from the German Wiki? I would then be able to add in some English language sources for both of these. It's too bad about the arts, as we do not yet have Beethoven's mother on the English Wiki.Hoops gza (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hope I did not put you off. Would you mind letting me know whether you plan to translate these requests? Hoops gza (talk) 02:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No, I've just been busy swotting for a Koine Greek exam! --Bermicourt (talk) 07:57, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've done the article for Falk Zipperer, although this may inspire you to do one for de:Haberfeldtreiben at some point. Hoops gza (talk) 04:01, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Gosh - looks a challenge! --Bermicourt (talk) 06:35, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Your Sandbox 9 has been showing up on a coordinate-error tool because the {{coord}} parameters are misformatted. I don't like to mess around in other people's sandboxes, so I'll just mention that the "name" parameter requires a pipe delimiter and is followed by an equals sign, not a colon—"type:landmark_name:Kalmit_region:DE-RP", for instance, should be "type:landmark_region:DE-RP|name=Kalmit". (Also, the mountains should probably have "type:mountain" rather than "type:landmark", and six decimal places is rather too precise [accurate to about 8 centimeters] in coordinates for such features.) I wouldn't mention it except that when you move the article to mainspace, someone will presumably have to fix the coordinates, especially if you plan to include the {{GeoGroup}} template. Deor (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:N-wegNL

Template:N-wegNL has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.

Connexion vs connection

Re: recent edits to Austrian Society for Railway History. I agree that connexion is a valid word and found in the Oxford Dictionary, however its usage is familiar to those who speak British English, as it is "an alternative British English spelling of the word connection" (from Wikipedia article Connexion). The spelling connection is more commonly found in other types of English (as well as being valid in British English, as it too is found in the Oxford Dictionary), and is therefore more familiar to the vast majority of Wikipedia users. Since Wikipedia's goal is to provide useful information to its readers, the change was made to connection. Would you please consider reverting your recent edit. Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

It's true that connection is the more common spelling. However, Wikipedia should try and reflect actual usage and, unless a spelling is wrong, it ought not to be automatically changed. There are probably few instances of "connexion" on Wikipedia, which reflects the the real world, but still reminds people that, although the spelling is rare, it is still valid. To delete all occurrences would be a false reflection (a bit like changing all instances of railroad to railway); that's how language gets watered down over time. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of German Railway Society

The article German Railway Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of group notability, no references or third party source discussion found

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LFaraone 18:29, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for Advice

Hi. I seem to remember you're an expert on German castles, and German regions and villages generally. Please would you take a look at this WP:RfD debate, which would probably benefit from your guidance: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_May_14#Eresburg. Thank you. RomanSpa (talk) 11:13, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. If you could create that article that would be great! Thank you. RomanSpa (talk) 05:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Conquered vs. climbed

Hello. With all due respect I disagree and have reverted your inclusion of the word. I will not edit war though so if you revert back, I will let stand. I may start a talk page topic, and you are of course free to do as well. I don't know if its worth it to me to even battle there over it. Thanks Bermicourt. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 10:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

It's really not worth it - I prefer to add new mountain articles than argue over a single word on an existing one. You've left the rest my edits on Zugspitze in place, so that's got to be an affirmation! --Bermicourt (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Zugspitze

I have responded to your post here. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 00:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Rescue!

Rescue From Deletion Award Awarded to editors who rescue a stub or an article from deletion with excellent writing; in this case, for fine guidance in a redirection debate and subsequent rescue of the article on Eresburg. With many thanks, RomanSpa (talk) 06:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Saddle (landform) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Saddle (landform). Since you had some involvement with the Saddle (landform) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Yecril (talk) 19:54, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Drachenfels Club

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Drachenfels Club requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  08:22, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Barbarine

Sorry about that edit, but why are you using non-English templates on the en wiki? BollyJeff | talk 13:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

It's to speed up the transfer of information from other wikis. I'm a translator, so the value I can add is translating article text, not converting infoboxes. So where infoboxes are very common on German Wikipedia as Template:Literatur is, we produce English Wikipedia versions that recognize the fields but translate them into English automatically. That means anyone can copy and past them without any difficulty. If, later, someone replaces the original infobox with the normal English one, that's fine as long as they can transfer all the information correctly. This is fairly common practice. --Bermicourt (talk) 14:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Gustav Gross

I saw your name on Wikipedia:Translators available, and noticed that you've recently been doing some translation from the German Wikipedia. I've been working on German nationalism in Austria, among other things, and could use this article from the German Wikipedia translated. It is about a pan-Germanist politician named "Gustav Gross", who led the Deutscher Nationalverband. It is a relatively short article, but my German is relatively poor, and I'd rather have it done properly. Thanks very much if you can oblige me. RGloucester — ☎ 22:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Done. Please proof read it for any typos, etc. I've used the spelling "Groß" for the article and "Gross" as a redirect, as that appears to be the usual convention, but if he's reported in English sources as Gross, it can be moved. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much! He's sometimes "Gross" and sometimes "Groß" in English, so I'm sure that its fine. RGloucester — ☎ 14:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

• Not sure if you're interested in another bout of translation, but if you are, I'd suggest this article. We have an article on the subject, Imperial Council (Austria), but it sub-par to the German one in every way. One of the most interesting things about the Council was the "Curia" system of election to House of Deputies, and we've got nothing on that, for instance. I've done a bit of work to transfer the lead and the section on the House of Lords to the English article, but I'm mostly out of my depth. RGloucester — ☎ 00:19, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I've done most of it myself, I think, at this point. Thanks for the help with Herr Gross, though! RGloucester — ☎ 20:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Enneagram of Personality

While I recognise your point it seems to me that in this case the only criticism currently in the section is very specific and that it may be appropriate, therefore, to indicate this in the heading. I won't revert your change but I will ask you to consider whether the previous heading is actually more appropriate at present. Some years ago the article had a more substantial criticism section which included other criticism as well as the Roman Catholic stuff. I'm not sure why this was removed but as I recall it was poorly referenced. Cheers, Afterwriting (talk) 14:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I've never seen a section headed "Foo Criticism" before - it's always just "Criticism", so I thought it was in line with Wiki practice. I'll maybe put a note for discussion on the talk page and let editors debate it. --Bermicourt (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Attribution requirements

Hello, Bermicourt. I saw your note at Talk:Roundel (fortification) while working on the suspected copyright violations page and just wanted to explain that, while you're quite right that content on German Wikipedia is under free license, that license does set some requirements that must be met in order for the content to be used. If those requirements aren't met, it's the same as having no license at all, and the material is fully reserved. We meet the requirement on English Wikipedia for copying content from one page to another or for translating content from one language to another with a mandatory specific link back to the source in the history page and with a recommended template on the talk page. I've added both to this one, but if you've translated other content without noting it or moved material within En Wiki, can you please add that attribution? I'm afraid without it, the content is a copyright issue. :/ You can read more about the issue and how to repair it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Please let me know at my talk page if you have any questions or here, if you "ping" me by linking my username. :) Thanks! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. :) Sorry I wasn't clear about that. Corensearchbot picks up a fair amount of those mirrors - we always just check to see if attribution has been provided. If it is, no worries - we just cross it off the list and move on. (But very helpful that you pointed out the origin on the talk page! Saves having to track it down.) But the talk page is only one part of the equation, and it's the lesser part. The link needs to be in the edit summary of the article, since people look to the history page for attribution. :) We do edit summaries like this one: [2]. It's best if you can do that when you create the article. I'm afraid I myself had a contributor very upset with me from the German Wikipedia when I forgot to attribute at the first point of entry. Even though I made it up within just a few edits, he was afraid that people would overlook the importance of his contribution. The German Wikipedia, I'm told, is even more careful about attribution histories than we are. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Your missing imports

Thank you for appreciating the hard work of me and others by simply translating it without naming the original authors. But that's a violation of the CC license. I want you to import the original reversion histories according to the rules of WP and the laws of Creative Commons. Sorry but you continued stealing content after someone told you about the issue on your talk page, so: not sorry. -- Chianti90 (talk)

Hi Chianti90 and thank you for your contributions. There is no violation of copyright as there are attributions on the talk pages. This complies with English Wikipedia policy. Please let me know if any attributions have been missed. Cheers. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

(watching) Different Wikipedias seem to have different rules. Here, it's fine to make a note of the translation on the talk page. In German, you have to go through an Import procedure if you are not the same author as the one in English, and the complete history is transferred, see for example de:Superlambanana, with a history back to 2005. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Gerda. Are you sure? See the discussion at Moonriddengirl where we translated the German edit text and it seems to say a link is acceptable. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Isn't that what I said? From English to German, you need an Import, the other way not. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

No, I think the German text says the minimum you need is a URL or link to the article. Have I not translated it correctly? Bermicourt (talk) 19:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

To my understanding, that text is about releasing rights, addressing someone who edits, as a warning that what he saves is free for reuse. Import, and keeping the history of an article, seems a completely different topic. - I learned about Import in German when I first translated an article by someone else. They imported the history afterwards, 9 February 2012: "22 Versionen von en:Dearborn River High Bridge: Nachimport"! (... and someone was in panic because at the time he was blocked here and didn't want his name to be seen there) - The concept is different, and someone who knows it the German way will be surprised missing it here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

It also addresses articles where the editor is not the author of the text. Moreover, German Wikipedia still refers to Importwuensche i.e. it doesn't seem to be mandatory. I am interested because I do very occasionally have a go at a German article! I may need your help in future. By the way, we miss Germany! --Bermicourt (talk) 19:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Wünsche seems a bit of a euphemism ;) - If you don't wish, you get Nachimport, they want the complete history. It doesn't hurt to import first, I always do it now if I didn't write the English, and it's typically handled the same day, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problems

The translations at Seefeld in Tirol, Wildsee (Seefeld), Seefeld Plateau, Seefeld Saddle and Zirler Berg are all attributed on their talk pages, so the copyright notices here have been removed. Bermicourt (talk) 19:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)